Ohio Democrats have elected Cincinnati lawyer David Pepper as their next chairman as the party looks to rebuild after a year of political missteps and devastating losses.

Pepper was selected by the state executive committee Tuesday to replace Chris Redfern. Redfern has resigned effective Dec. 31 after a bruising campaign season that included losing his own House seat and every statewide election.

Pepper was Democrats’ 2014 attorney general candidate. He plans to have state Sen. Nina Turner, the party’s 2014 secretary of state candidate, on his leadership team.

Pepper and Turner say they will win elections by instituting “a culture of high ethics, accountability, transparency, trust and fairness” and promoting diversity and inclusion.

Pepper, a former Hamilton County commissioner, is son of a former CEO of Procter & Gamble.

The radio station is reporting that Peppers only opponent, Sharon Neuhardt is dropping out of the race. Former Ohio Democratic leader Chris Redfern resigned after the November election, in which all the Democrats lost all statewide races. WVXU is reporting that Neuhardt resigned in an email to her supporters.

Neuhardt said in her e-mail that it is time to unite the party and start winning elections again.

“Because we need to unite our party, get on with the business of winning the Democratic convention for Columbus, and implementing our shared vision for moving the party forward and winning elections, I want each of you to know that I am withdrawing my name as a candidate,’’ Neuhardt wrote to her supporters.

Pepper was the unsuccessful candidate for Ohio attorney general this year, losing to Mike DeWine in the general election.

Democratic attorney general candidate David Pepper has paid nearly $10,000 in parking fines over the past 14 years after being ticketed more than 180 times, according to records reviewed by The Associated Press.

Hamilton County court records show Pepper, who faces Republican incumbent Mike DeWine this fall, was ticketed mostly for parking at meters that had expired or in no-parking or truck loading zones. He also was ticketed about a dozen times for displaying expired plates.

The AP review shows Pepper was cited an average of 13 times a year, most recently in July. The bulk of the tickets came from 2007 to 2009, while he was county commissioner. Fines ranged from $14 to $100, some doubled because they were paid late.

Campaign spokesman Peter Koltak said Pepper got many of the tickets while attending late meetings.

“Amid a hectic schedule, mostly years back, David got too many tickets, and he paid them,” Koltak said. “He’s happy to debate old parking tickets versus Mike DeWine’s current practices as attorney general.”

Pepper, a Cincinnati lawyer, has criticized DeWine for politicizing the process for doling out lucrative state collections and special counsel work.

The Democrat’s dozens of parking tickets come to light as Democrats’ gubernatorial candidate, Ed FitzGerald, faces criticism for lacking a valid driver’s license for a decade.

Records show Pepper has paid $9,229 for 182 tickets since 2000, continuing to park illegally even after his high number of citations was featured in the local news.

DeWine campaign spokesman Ryan Stubenrauch said having so many tickets isn’t a simple oversight.

“Nearly everyone has made a mistake by forgetting to go back and feed a parking meter,” Stubenrauch said. “But that Mr. Pepper racked up nearly $10,000 in fines shows a stunning disregard for basic traffic laws – particularly for someone running to be Ohio’s top law officer.”

Attorney General Mike DeWine is standing by his officeâ€™s policies when it comes to selecting law firms to perform state work.

The process is under fire after The Dayton Daily News reported a possible link between campaign contributions and awarded contracts.

Now DeWine’s Democratic challenger is piling on.

David Pepper, the Democratic candidate for attorney general, wants to revamp the system that chooses which firms and companies get contracted for state work. The Cincinnati Democrat says the current policies lack honesty and accountability.

Pepper unveiled his plan in response to a report from the Dayton Daily News showing that law firms seeking state work from the attorney generalâ€™s office made $1.3 million in campaign contributions to Attorney General Mike DeWineâ€™s campaign, the campaign of DeWineâ€™s son, and the Ohio Republican Party.

Pepper says this is clearly a pay-to-play process.

â€œThe worst part â€” perhaps â€” is except for one firm whose head lawyer had been in trouble and ultimately was disbarredâ€”every firm that sent checks on the same day got work,” Pepper says.

“Firms that sent checks a week after they sent the proposal inâ€”got work. My view is those are the checks that are the most troublesome but in the last couple of years success rate of people sending in checks on the same day has been incredible.â€

These are firms that are applying to represent the state in securities fraud cases and other legal issues.

DeWine denies contributions playing any role in which companies are offered a contract.

The current process, DeWine says, involves lawyers in his office searching for applicants that match the appropriate set of skills needed for any given case. He adds that his office also tries to find the best price.

According to Pepper, if he were attorney general, he would implement five steps to improve the selection process. Pepper says he would make it clear which firms, companies and vendors were doing work for the attorney generalâ€™s office; he would set clear objectives for how these applications would be judged; create an independent review board; ban contributions before, during and after the application process; and require full disclosure of contributions.

According to DeWine, some of Pepperâ€™s suggestions are policies already in place at the attorney generalâ€™s office, like transparent contract records. However, DeWine took issue with other elements of Pepperâ€™s plan, like the independent review board made up of legal professionals.

â€œA panel that he is talking about, of lawyers who would make this decision, would create a potential attorney-client problem in that we would have to disclose information to the panel that might be attorney-client privileged information between us as the lawyers and the state university or the state agency involved.â€

DeWine says this kind of suggestion shows Pepper is inexperienced and unsuited to be Ohioâ€™s attorney general.

â€œDavid Pepper really is the most unqualifiedâ€”person with a lack of qualificationsâ€”of anybody in my lifetime ever to run for attorney genera,” DeWine says.

“Heâ€™s never prosecuted a case, has precious little experience in any kind of serious litigation in a courtroom. So I think this just showsâ€”franklyâ€”his lack of knowledge and understanding about the office.â€

Pepper admits that there are probably firms listed in the report that have contributed to his own campaign but he doesnâ€™t see it as a problem as long as he launches his proposed changes to the application system. Pepper believes companies will be relieved by his plan.

“I canâ€™t think of a worse situation than a managing partner in a good law firm sending in a proposal to the AGâ€™s office and then getting a call a week later asking for money. I canâ€™t think of anything worse for the head of that firm that theyâ€™re stuck thinkingâ€”listen everyoneâ€™s doing itâ€”I either give a contribution and risk looking like Iâ€™m part of something I donâ€™t want to be part of. Or I say no to the attorney general and I donâ€™t get picked.â€

Pepper says itâ€™s not for him to say whether DeWine broke the law but did say heâ€™d like to see an investigation by the U.S. attorney. House Democrats have sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice asking for a review.

]]>http://wosu.org/2012/news/2014/02/04/dewine-denies-awarding-donors-with-state-contracts/feed/0attorney general,David Pepper,election 2014,Mike DeWine,state contractsMike DeWine is defending himself against news reports and comments from his Democratic challenger that he's running a "pay to play" system in awarding state contracts.Mike DeWine is defending himself against news reports and comments from his Democratic challenger that he's running a "pay to play" system in awarding state contracts.WOSU Newsno4:13AG Candidate: Office Shouldn’t “Defend Constitutional Violations”http://wosu.org/2012/news/2014/01/21/ag-candidate-office-shouldnt-defend-constitutional-violations/
http://wosu.org/2012/news/2014/01/21/ag-candidate-office-shouldnt-defend-constitutional-violations/#commentsTue, 21 Jan 2014 13:29:21 +0000Nick Castelehttp://wosu.org/2012/news/?p=64723

Democratic attorney general candidate David Pepper says he would consider not defending the state in court if his office deems a law unconstitutional.

The Democratic candidate for Ohio Attorney General says if elected this November, heâ€™ll make voting rights a key priority of his office.

Attorney General candidate David Pepper says heâ€™d create a unit within the attorney generalâ€™s Civil Rights Division to investigate reports of voter intimidation, suppression or fraud. He says heâ€™d also inform legislators if a bill created voting restrictions he found to be unconstitutional.

And he says if the general assembly passes new voting rules laws he concludes are unconstitutional, heâ€™ll file a court brief saying soâ€”and he says in some cases he may decline to defend them in court.

â€œIf the legislature is violating the constitutional rights of your citizens, the attorney general doesnâ€™t simply blindly defend constitutional violations,” Pepper says. “The attorney general as a separate officeholder has the duty to speak out on behalf of citizensâ€™ constitutional rights.â€

Current Attorney General Mike DeWine agrees he can speak out against laws he finds unconstitutional. But he says itâ€™s the AGâ€™s job to defend state law.

â€œYou always have an obligation to defend the state,” DeWine says.

“What we did in one particular case where we felt that the law was unconstitutional, clearly unconstitutional, my office still defended that case.â€

That case involved a law against false elections advertising. While his office defended the law, DeWine also filed a friend-of-the-court brief questioning its constitutionality.

Pepper says heâ€™d have done the same thing with laws limiting early voting hours in 2012, and changing ballot access rules for third parties.

DeWineâ€™s office helped defend those, but didnâ€™t protest their constitutionality, and judges later blocked them â€“ though DeWine has appealed the ruling on third parties.